Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

techrights.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 84 posts

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#61

Post by bahlhala »

dleslie wrote: post #51
Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads like you don't see individuals, you just see representatives of racial and gender groups. That's the same vibe I get from racists and sexists. What is the fundamental difference between these essentialising, group-identity-based views?

> That's the same vibe I get from racists and sexists. The vibe you're detecting is prejudice. They are exhibiting prejudice against individuals on the basis of immutable traits like gender and ethnicity.

I think of it as we can see its not right just now and there are no other idea on the table.

I may just be racist or sexist though.. however i dont know why i would give a shit if that was the case?

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#62

Post by apacheCamel »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #57
apacheCamel wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Drink milk" campaign in my elementary school would be a good example. You should drink more milk, doesn't mean you should drink less water, or juice or whatever. It just means drink more milk.

Assuming that you can drink an infinite amount of liquid, yes. But in practice "drink more milk" means "drink less soda".

>Assuming that you can drink an infinite amount of liquid, yes.

You would also assume that people drink their "max quota" of drinks a day, thus being forced to eliminate something to make room. There's always room for milk my friend.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#63

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

TeaDrunk wrote: post #52
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not to say there's no such push at all, but by no means I would call it large.

I mean I'm not even a nurse/not in childcare and I know about it, so it's certainly not fringe.

So. I've just googled "hire more men". In a private tab with a naive hope that google will get me out of whatever bubble it put me into.

This is the first page:

- why employers favor men

- women outnumber men in the paid workforce

- why employers favor men

- women rehired less than men

- if there is a real gender pay gap, why do firms hire men

(I will spare the readers from remaining five links, but trust me, nothing groundbreaking was there)

Again, this is not to say there's no push to hire men. It's just somewhere "in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard"."

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#64

Post by robert_foss »

tasogare wrote: post #37
robert_foss wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of curiosity, what constitutes racism to you? Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people'. He has clearly played to the racists parts of his base on numerous occasions. If actions promoting racism isn't racism, then I don't know what is.

Judging someone simply on his race. Simple example: refusing a job to someone because of this criterion. It doesn’t matter if Asian, Black, White or other, if the candidate is dismissed because of race, it’s racism.

So supporting an entrenched system of racism is not racism then? If so I can see why not much progress is being made.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#65

Post by TeaDrunk »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #63
TeaDrunk wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I'm not even a nurse/not in childcare and I know about it, so it's certainly not fringe.

So. I've just googled "hire more men". In a private tab with a naive hope that google will get me out of whatever bubble it put me into. This is the first page: - why employers favor men - women outnumber men in the paid workforce - why employers favor men - women rehired less than men - if there is a real gender pay gap, why do firms hire men (I will spare the readers from remaining five links, but trust me, nothing…

So I also googled "hire more men" and I got on the first page 'should schools be trying to hire more men' and the first return was 'small companies hire more men to avoid maternity burden'.

So I don't know how this proves anything either way.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#66

Post by dleslie »

bahlhala wrote: post #61
dleslie wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's the same vibe I get from racists and sexists. The vibe you're detecting is prejudice. They are exhibiting prejudice against individuals on the basis of immutable traits like gender and ethnicity.

I think of it as we can see its not right just now and there are no other idea on the table. I may just be racist or sexist though.. however i dont know why i would give a shit if that was the case?

It's possible to be self-aware of one's own faults and want to change, but still exhibit the errant behaviour.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#67

Post by dleslie »

bahlhala wrote: post #59
Wolfenstein98k wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads like you don't see individuals, you just see representatives of racial and gender groups. That's the same vibe I get from racists and sexists. What is the fundamental difference between these essentialising, group-identity-based views?

i get where you are coming from.. but the problem is the lack of a better option, this is not a perfect solution. as i said elswhere in comments - i saw my dad being respected for an ability to do stuff with his computer (computers were not generally used in offices etc. at the time). my childs mind wanted to get some of that respect.. so i invested time learning and playing with computers. I saw white dudes on tv do…

I suspect your kids will be fine as long as they have a supportive and conscientious parent, as you seem to be.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#68

Post by TeaDrunk »

supergeek133 wrote: post #32
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about "we should try to hire more asian men in black women dominated fields"?

Honest question I could probably google or something, but what are some "black women dominated fields"?

I would argue that beauty products catered specifically to kinky/extremely curly hair and deeper skin tend to be dominated by black women. (Issues to address: Ashiness of skin, undertone colors for foundation/concealer, hair needing to be well-moisturized)

At least on my recent memory, when Fenty Beauty first came on the scene it blew up extremely fast, as it was one of the first major makeup companies specifically catering to non-beige skin colors... the company was founded by the artist Rihanna, who identifies as black.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#69

Post by raxxorrax »

bahlhala wrote: post #50
raxxorrax wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't think this to be a problem, I don't see how you could criticize people only hiring certain skin colors, which is probably extremely rare in the western world. I know that bias is the next argument, but it is just as baseless.

Honestly I find it kind of easier to get on with northern European white males.. because I am one and I hav elots in common with them.. Our parents did similar things, we eat similar foods, we grew up in similar houses.. I find it easier to predict their moods and behaviours etc.. cos they are like me. However, that doesn't mean to say we are in any way right or better than any one else. When i work with people who a…

See, if I travel to another culture, I don't expect it to change to my whims. I would think if they don't value their own culture, they probably wouldn't value mine either.

I do actually work with many ethnicities and have come to the realization that they are all idiots. There are differences in representation between production and administration, but not because of bias or racism.

> so really we have to go for immersion therapy

No thanks. You are free to travel though.

> We (white men)

Jehovah's witnesses tried the same shtick once as they tried to include me in their believes, but we are no group. That would only lead to quarrels. Europe wasn't always as peaceful, even if everyone was pretty pink.

> if our daughters dont see their mothers working in IT

Honestly I think the situation got worse for women in the last 10 years. Through expectations placed upon them by others and themselves. Formerly it was a rarity but few really noticed it. Now their actions would be put under more scrutiny. Here bias does indeed play a role and some discussion emphasized that it apparently isn't normal for women to be in IT.

> we just have to kind of force a more diverse group

I fundamentally disagree that anybody needs to be forced. Freedom of association and that thing... Plus, that already happened countless times before and it will happen again.

Re: 2,445 IBM Employees Openly Condemned IBM for Enabling Racist Regimes

#70

Post by CWuestefeld »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #7
mensetmanusman wrote: post #2

Are they asking management to pull out of having any operations in China and India?

Are they asking management to pull out of the USA? Which has conducted illegal wars, and pulled out of nuclear talks with Iran.

The USA has plenty of problems. But they don't include murdering 10s of millions of people, harvesting organs from prisoners, policies leading to enforced abortions and murders of baby girls, and universal suppression of speech.

Moral calculus can be dangerous, but the numbers are so huge that it seems fair to me to put the 20th century communist regimes at the top of the list for most evil.

Post reply on HN